Fivem

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the Intel Arc B370 represents a stark imbalance in Fivem, producing frame rates that are almost entirely constrained by the integrated graphics solution. The data shows a configuration where a high-end 20-core processor is paired with a GPU that ranks in the 5th percentile, resulting in a gaming experience that is playable only at the lowest settings and resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, contextualizes the component roles, and provides actionable settings guidance based strictly on the provided benchmark data.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a formidable processor on paper, built on the Arrow Lake architecture and manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It features 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its substantial 30 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth) position it as a top-tier desktop part. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 35,850 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,020 in single-core, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs tested. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6511P (0.2% slower) and the Intel Core i7-14700KF (1% faster), confirming its high-end standing.

However, in the context of Fivem, the CPU's immense capability is largely untapped. The measured frame rates are so low—ranging from 14 FPS at 4K Ultra to 80 FPS at 1080p Low—that the processor is never the limiting factor. The Core Ultra 7 265K has more than enough headroom to handle the game's simulation and networking logic, which is typical for a multiplayer title. The data suggests that the CPU is effectively idle, waiting on the graphics subsystem to deliver frames. For instance, at 1080p Low, the CPU could easily push hundreds of frames per second, but the system reports only 80 FPS, a clear indication that the bottleneck lies elsewhere. The 20-core configuration provides massive parallel processing power, but Fivem's performance in this pairing does not benefit from it because the frame delivery is throttled by the GPU.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B370 is the primary culprit for the low performance, functioning as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 25 W TDP. It is based on the Xe3-LPG architecture (Panther Lake chip) and operates at a base clock of 300 MHz, boosting to 2400 MHz. Critically, its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it has no dedicated VRAM and relies on the system's main memory, with bandwidth that is "System Dependent." This setup is fundamentally inadequate for a demanding multiplayer game like Fivem. With only 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, its raw compute power is very limited, offering 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 performance.

The GPU's benchmark results are equally telling. Its only recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1,184, which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are legacy parts like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (0.5% faster) and the AMD FirePro M2000 (1.4% slower). This places the Arc B370's performance in the same tier as graphics cards from over a decade ago. In Fivem, this translates to severe frame rate limitations. The data shows that even at 1080p with Low settings, the GPU can only manage 80 FPS. When settings are increased to Ultra at 1080p, the frame rate collapses to 39 FPS. At 4K Ultra, it drops to an unplayable 14 FPS. The "System Shared" memory is a particular bottleneck; as resolution increases, the demand for memory bandwidth and capacity grows, which the shared architecture cannot efficiently supply, leading to the dramatic performance drops observed in the resolution scaling section.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data across resolutions clearly illustrates the GPU-bound nature of this configuration. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 80 FPS at 1920x1080 to 53 FPS at 2560x1440, and further to 29 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 33.75% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 45.28% drop from 1440p to 4K. This steep decline is a classic symptom of a GPU that is overwhelmed by pixel count. A CPU-bound scenario would show far less variance across resolutions, as the processor's workload remains constant regardless of output resolution.

The trend is consistent across all settings. For High settings, the frame rates are 50 FPS (1080p), 33 FPS (1440p), and 18 FPS (4K). For Medium, they are 63 FPS (1080p), 41 FPS (1440p), and 23 FPS (4K). The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic collapse, dropping from 39 FPS at 1080p to 26 FPS at 1440p and finally to 14 FPS at 4K. The scaling factor from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is a 64.1% reduction in performance. This non-linear drop, where the performance penalty of moving to 4K is disproportionately large, is characteristic of a GPU that has exhausted its fillrate and memory bandwidth. The resolution scaling data unequivocally points to the Intel Arc B370 as the limiting component, as the frame rate is directly tied to the number of pixels being rendered.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the grand scheme of tested hardware combinations for Fivem, this pairing performs exceptionally poorly. The data places this combo at rank 2,762 out of 3,005 tested combos, putting it in the bottom 8.1% of all systems. This ranking is a direct consequence of the Intel Arc B370's weak performance, which drags down the otherwise excellent Intel Core Ultra 7 265K. The processor's 94th percentile ranking is completely negated by the GPU's 5th percentile standing.

This rank of 2,762 out of 3,005 indicates that the vast majority of other CPU-GPU pairings deliver higher frame rates in Fivem. The delta between this combo's performance and the median is substantial. While the CPU is a top-tier part capable of handling any modern game, the GPU is a mobile-class integrated solution that is not designed for gaming workloads. The result is a system that, despite its powerful processor, underperforms most entry-level dedicated graphics card setups. This ranking serves as a stark warning about the importance of component balance; a high-end CPU cannot compensate for a severely underpowered GPU in a graphics-intensive game like Fivem.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured data, the only viable settings for a playable experience are at 1080p with the Low preset, which yields an average of 80 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth frame rate suitable for a multiplayer title. The Medium preset at 1080p offers 63 FPS, which is still playable, but the 17 FPS loss from Low to Medium suggests the GPU is already struggling with increased visual fidelity. For users with a 1080p monitor, the Low preset is recommended for the best balance of responsiveness and visual clarity, as the 80 FPS average ensures a fluid experience.

At 1440p, the situation becomes more challenging. The Low preset at 2560x1440 averages 53 FPS, which may be acceptable for some, but it is a significant drop from the 1080p experience. The Medium preset at this resolution drops to 41 FPS, which is borderline playable but will feel less responsive. For 4K, all settings are unplayable, with even the Low preset only managing 29 FPS. The data suggests that this combo should not be used for 4K gaming under any circumstances. The optimal strategy for this hardware is to prioritize resolution over quality, choosing 1080p Low or Medium to maintain a playable frame rate. High and Ultra presets should be avoided at all resolutions, as they consistently produce sub-60 FPS averages, with the Ultra preset at 4K producing a slideshow-like 14 FPS.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combo for this hardware in Fivem?

A: According to the measured data, the best experience is at 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which averages 80 FPS. The Medium preset at the same resolution is also viable at 63 FPS, but Low is the only preset to hit a high refresh rate target.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 70,879. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6511P, scores 71,051, making the Core Ultra 7 265K 0.2% slower. It is also 0.7% slower than the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (score 71,370) and 1% slower than the Intel Core i7-14700KF (score 70,163).

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile, and what does it imply?

A: The Intel Arc B370 is in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it performs better than only 5% of all tested graphics cards. This low standing is reflected in its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,184, which is comparable to legacy graphics cards like the ATI Radeon HD 5770.

Q: Why does the frame rate drop so significantly when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: The frame rate drops significantly due to the GPU's limited processing power and "System Shared" memory. For example, at Low settings, the average FPS falls from 80 at 1080p to 29 at 4K, a 63.75% decrease. This is because the GPU must render four times as many pixels, overwhelming its 1280 shading units and shared memory bandwidth.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this configuration?

A: The data shows the GPU is the primary limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 94th percentile, while the GPU ranks in the 5th. The frame rates are consistently low across all tests, and the performance scales heavily with resolution and settings, which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck.

Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU-GPU combo for Fivem?

A: This specific combo ranks 2,762 out of 3,005 tested combinations. This places it in the bottom tier of performance, indicating that it is outperformed by the vast majority of other systems tested in this game.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following table details the exact average frame rates measured for this configuration in Fivem.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

| :--------- | :------- | -------: | -------: | -------: |

| 3840x2160 | High | 18 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 29 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 23 | 20 | 26 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 14 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 33 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 53 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 41 | 35 | 48 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 26 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 50 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 80 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 63 | 54 | 72 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 39 | - | - |

The data confirms a consistent pattern: performance degrades predictably as resolution and graphical fidelity increase. The only playable frame rates are found at 1080p, with the Low preset providing the best average of 80 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p shows a range of 54 to 72 FPS, with an average of 63 FPS. Every other configuration falls below the 60 FPS threshold, with 4K Ultra hitting a low of 14 FPS. This breakdown quantifies the severe GPU bottleneck and provides a clear guide for users: stick to 1080p and lower settings to achieve a functional experience in Fivem.